In an earlier post, I approvingly quoted someone describing the journal wiki as sucky. Doug Portmore, who started the wiki, although I didn't know it at the time, left a gracious comment to that post. Maybe this is too little, too late, but I want to go on the record as saying that I like the journal wiki, and I find it really useful, and I consult it whenever I have a paper to submit. Although I wish there was an average-calculating grid, I don't think it sucks. I was being a jerk, and I apologize to Prof. Portmore for failing to properly appreciate his efforts. It was really cool of him to set it up, and not cool of me to say it sucks.
--Mr. Zero
5 comments:
Mr. Zero,
There's no need to apologize. The journal wiki is pretty sucky, but since it's a wiki, we all share the blame for that. In any case, there's no hurt feelings here. I like the edgy and provocative tone.
Kudos to both of you. Very stand-up for Mr. Zero to publicly issue a thoughtful apology. Professor Portmore's acceptance was gracious and self-effacing in the best possible way....
now...um....maybe it's time for a post that'll provoke some discussion...
Hey,
I've been experimenting with different ways to improve on Doug's work.
I think I finally found a really good way to do what everyone would like the journal wiki to do.
Here's a test of the idea...
http://www.andrewcullison.com/2009/07/best-journal-survey-method-so-far/
If you get a chance, check it out and let me know what you think.
If people like this method, I could have everything up and running very soon.
ps
Once I have the format of the survey/spreadsheet hammered out for Mind, I can clone everything for the other journals and have surveys and data tables up for all of the journals on the phil wiki very soon.
Andrew,
Awesome. I really like it. Thanks for putting in the work.
Post a Comment